Talk:Furby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Protect?

I got a suggestion that we can protect Furby because it keeps being vandalized too much. This is only a suggestion. --MyMii 14:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] More vandalism

Deleted this from the article..."They Are My Only Buddies. Best Chums Forever!!!!! me too i cant believe we have something in common" --GranTurismo2 18:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)




[edit] Vandalism

Deleted this from the article..."The main reason that many people liked them was because they were homosexuals and stupid."—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.54.90 (talk • contribs)

Thank you. You didn't catch all the vandalism unfortunately. I have recovered back to last OK version. Nunquam Dormio 07:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Changes

Made a few changes on the Spanish article and I thought I would apply them also to the English one. Just hope it helps. Please, double-check my English :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.3.239 (talk • contribs)

There should be a photograph for this article. -- Kaihsu 16:49, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

I heard that the Furby's "learning ability" was just a timed processor that changed its "furbish language" more and more into "english language". (Of course, the furbish vocabulary was very limited.)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.113.118 (talk • contribs)

Ok, the page seems to express that, already...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.113.118 (talk • contribs)

I made a tiny change where the article compared the ears of a Furby to "wings on an owl". just so you know. Andromeda8 (talk) 18:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)andromeda8

[edit] Hacking

"They are still popular with many hackers as they can be dissected and made to do interesting things."

Such as...? Fantom 19:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Read some of the links, especially the "furby autopsy" which is not only hilarious, but informative. poo on your self

[edit] Page Introduction

"Furbys are real animals. They were originally discovered in 1998, and could talk, play games, dance, and communicate with other Furbys. They also had a central nervous system sound sensors(ears), and light sensors(eyes)."

Is this introduction absolutely nessesary? This is an encyclopedia for christ's sake, not the label on a child's toy. I believe this introduction should be changed immediately to comply with Wikipedia's NPOV guidelines. -67.110.176.68 14:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, that inroduction seems doesn't fit in the standars of wikipedia. It should be changed or removed. Ptikobj 16:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

There was a better one from an earlier revision that I just added back into the article. This page seems to have gotten a lot of attention from vandals lately. The demiurge 18:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The last paragraph on the introduction section is wrong. Caleb Chung was actually the inventor of the Furby, while David Hampton wrote much of the programming script that coordinates its movements. Although Hampton selfishly took most of the credit for its invention, the Furby was actually conceived and created by Caleb Chung with Hampton's help for its programming. The inspiration for the toy came from a hamster which Chung's daughter had at the time. - BBA

[edit] Furbies are made in sweatshops?

Check this out. [1] It's true and I'm suprised it's not in the article. 00:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Alexzero77

This article is not really the right place to discuss this issue, IMO. The article you cite points out that 90% of the world's toys are produced in China under similar conditions. It doesn't seem appropriate to link to that article from every toy article. Perhaps you could take this information over to Sweatshop, where it may be more relevant. Chovain 06:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It may not be relevant to say these were made in bad conditions but it is important to note that there was an important amount of controversy on the subject when they were released.

[edit] Emoto-Tronic Furby

Why are we having so many changes to the name of the new Furbies? A quick Google [2] suggests there is no such thing as an "Island Furby", and there is no hint that the new Furbies are called anything but Emoto-Tronic Furbies on the Hasbro site [3], [4]. I'm going to revert the change. If anyone thinks it really is called an "Island Furby", please put a link or something in here when you change the heading again. Chovain 14:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banning

Can anyone explain the phenomenon of a school 'banning' a certain fad? What is it about the popularity of a toy/game that makes it more disruptive than any other object brought to school? You can't do anything in school other than pay attention to lectures without getting into trouble, so I'm just not understanding this policy.

The nosies it makes can be annoying and disrupt a class.

[edit] The Prank call

Should we put in the prank call with Milton and such and such?81.154.172.140 18:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Furbies dying?

At the time I remember a lot of people saying that their furbies would die if they communicated with other furbies in a certain way. Was there any truth in this or was it yet another Furby myth?

[edit] Furby Stories

This article mentions how it's big with hacker communities and other people who like to modify the furbys. Maybe we should find a link to that kind of thing. I've heard so many hilarious stories about modded furbys - like a guy who painted his with glow in the dark paint and gave it glowing red eyes. The guy who got his to say swear words. Stories of feral furbies - etc.

[edit] Farbie Vandalism

Dont know why, but the Google Video Search gives out only such items. [5] making an impression that killing furby is the best effect for fireworks and other dangerous experiments with fire

  • Will be interesting to know, does everyone burn doewn his/her furby?

Or some people love them?

[edit] Another US-Centric article

Presumably, most of the first section of the article applies only to the US. Even if the product was only sold on the American market, this still needs to be stated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.155.138.250 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Without a reference, it's hard to say really. I've just taking a shot at providing links making it clearer for us non-US readers, but I'd rather see effort go toward adding references and improving the overall quality of information, rather than making wild guesses at where it was or wasn't released. If you can find a reference indicating where it was initially released, or when it was released where, by all means put the info in (or post it here on the talk page and I'll put it in for you). BTW, don't forget to sign your comments with 4 tildes (just type "~~~~" at the end) when posting on talk pages. Mark Chovain 05:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. I don't have any better information than that quoted, but surely the numerous dates and figures given are meaningless without some scope? I very much doubt that Furbys were released throughout the entire globe in the "Holiday Season of 1998". And where were those 1.8 million units sold? Worldwide? As I say, I don't know the answers, but the information as presented is valueless IMO 217.155.138.250 (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Motivation of Parents Violates Impariality

In several places its stated parents had a greater motivation to get a furby then the child, and that parents were forced to buy them for 300 or more dollars at auction "just to make their child happy". The motivation of the parent's actions violates the concept of impariality, in addition to being unvarifiable and therefore having no place in the article. I'd ask for an editor's permission to alter these points or for them to do it themselves.